I have been watching the French TV drama Coeurs Noirs (Dark Hearts), about the men and women of a commando group fighting ISIS in Iraq. Not everyone’s cup of tea to be sure but then – shameful though it might seem – I suspect I am not the only person who enjoys snuggling down on an autumn night to watch a good war film.
But when it comes to Dark Hearts, there’s a side of me that resists identifying with ‘the good guys’ – in this case, a group of young, attractive and emotionally sensitive French soldiers. On the face of it, you might expect that would be enough to draw you in. The problem, however, is how the ‘the bad guys’ are depicted. Viewed from a distance, down the barrel of an assault rifle for example, they are portrayed as faceless, black-clad fanatics. In close-up, the standard look is a grubby vest and a 5-day stubble, as in the arrest photo of 9/11 mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. At my most critical, I find myself thinking that Dark Hearts is essentially a video game with added dialogue for the quieter bits. As the commandos progress through alleyways or courtyards any jihadis they encounter are instantly shot and fall to the floor, just like in those video games known as first-person shooters.
Watching Dark Hearts, with the ongoing siege and bombardment of Gaza serving as a sort of real-life backdrop, I found myself confusing the fictional French commandos with the IDF soldiers being shown every night on TV news channels: fresh-faced, young men and women, determined, yet nervous; faced, as in the drama, with a fanatical and merciless death-cult. It is as if the narrative being presented by western governments and news media to explain the Gaza war is not all that different from a gripping TV drama. You have a setting in which a number of things are made clear: there are people with whom we are invited to identify and others (for the most part faceless) of whom only the very worst can be expected. The purpose of the setting is to justify and intensify high levels of violence meted out on the bad guys by the good guys.
All of which brings me to the historical present which is the term used to describe the tendency noted in radio and TV historians to stick to the present tense when describing events that happened in the past. I believe it is meant to bring history to life by making us feel as if we are right there, on the spot, where history is taking place. All the same, it seems a strange thing for a historian to indulge in, as it makes it really difficult talking about events that might have happened before the time in question and even more difficult to acknowledge future consequences.
But this appears to be precisely where we are stuck right now – in a permanent and ongoing historical present. UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres recently broke the taboo by stating that the October 7th Hamas attack ‘did not happen in a vacuum’, giving rise to widespread accusations that he was seeking to justify what happened. If this had indeed been his intention then the accusations might well have been warranted. Nevertheless, as has since become clear, not only is justification considered unacceptable right now but insight, explanation and understanding must all be thrown out as well.
For myself I have just started reading Enemies and Neighbours: Arabs and Jews in Palestine and Israel, 1917-2017 by Ian Black. It is described as having ‘deservedly won plaudits from both Palestinian and Israeli historians’. Unlike in TV dramas, it relates a story that unfolds layer by layer. Although it starts in 1917 with the Balfour Declaration, the first chapter goes back to the last days of the Ottoman Empire.
My first impression of the book is that the explanations never go back quite far enough. I’d like them to go all the way back to the point where we can say:
“Look – that’s what started it all.”
But as that is clearly never going to happen, the only realistic course of action is one that seeks to bring about a state of peaceful and prosperous coexistence between all the peoples of the region and in which the present horrific events can be gradually consigned to history.
Surely as someone raised in a Bible-reading family you must know this goes back at least as far as the battles between God’s Chosen People and the Philistines ( as Palestinians wre then pronounced)
And there’s this this Amalek guy also …
Suggest you sample the BBC production of Le Carre’s The Little Drummer Girl for a more nuanced look at that particular historical present.
I think I watched that when it came out. Like so many other things these days, the fact that I don’t remember it that well doesn’t mean I didn’t enjoy it.
Thank you for your thought provoking blog. It reminded me of an ‘incident’ in 2003 when I was working in Kabul, we had a suicide bomber at our office, the UN Electoral Division, and when we returned to work a couple of days later, I sought out the UN security people and asked if anyone had made a claim or demand, basically I wanted to know why someone had chosen to give up their life and for what cause. I was met with looks as if I were some treasonous traitor and was told that they didn’t know, it was obvious that neither did they care. My colleagues were of the same view. Every remembrance day I always say a prayer for that bomber who thought something warranted his sacrifice, but no one cared to find out what it was.
David
Thanks for this. Two things from my perspective.
Guterres may have been brave but he was also right.
If you liked ‘Dark Hearts’ watch ‘Fauda’; its much better, current and predicts what has happened in Gaza – I though it was great (start with Series 1 watch the characters, and their PTSD, build.
Insightful as ever David,and putting what I think a lot of people are thinking into words. Shame our political representatives seem unable to do so….but what bugs me is that I cant even understand why it is so hard for our politicians to call for a ceasefire. As every child knows, two wrongs don’t make a right, but also the longer this slaughter goes on, the longer it will take to find a political solution – which surely is the inevitable outcome……..one day.
Also reading ‘Enemies and Neighbours’ which I’ve had for ages but never quite got round to. Not sure if I’ll stay the course but it’s a good analysis so far.
Incidentally I shared a house with Ian Black and others in the summer before university
If going back to the Assyrian exile of Jews in the 8th century BCE is a read too far I recommend two feature length documentaries: Blue Box by a young Israeli film maker whose grandfather was involved in the appropriation, legal and otherwise, of Palestinian land before and after 1948, using his diaries and interviews with his family; also Two Blue Lines, a documentary made by Israeli Jews the impact of Jewish settlement on the Palestinians since before the second war. Although both made by Israeli Jews they achieve an empathy with Palestinians and a balance that is hard to find in political commentary at the moment.
Thanks for all the comments.
What I was surprised to learn recently was that the first Jewish settlers (prior to 1917) typically bought land from wealthy, absentee, feudal lords (Ottoman).
Of course the poor farmers who had lived on the land for generations and found themselves displaced didn’t know what had hit them.
So all perfectly legal and proper but no less unjust for all that.
Hi David,
An interesting blog. I also watched ‘Dark Hearts’ [the French always do these TV dramas better than the Americans], which is of course ultimately a story of a failed French mission with the highly trained and sophisticated French operation outfoxed by its sole Iraqi captive who possesses info on potential attacks in Paris. The French soldiers are given characters and stories [it is after all about the French] as is the Iraqi captive. The Dark Hearts members are killed usually in a surprise attack scenario but again drive the French back when they intern catch them out by surprise.
Turning to the current real-life situation in Gaza, the Israel military commanders and politicians presented before the media wouldn’t win any PR competition but rather universally come across as cold and calculating, immune to and unable to see let alone consider the thousands of dead Palestinian civilians, 70% of whom are said to be women and children. Watching/reading the media I would say that those civilians are portrayed as innocent bystanders in this unfolding tragedy whereas we see nothing of Hamas mainly because they don’t make themselves available.
A difficulty with ‘deep dives’ into history is that whilst it might help us all better to understand a particular parts of the world, it doesn’t necessarily help to solve current situations. Some things in history need to be left there. Interestingly, the Palestinians don’t do that but confine their historical references to the last 100 years and particularly the occupation. The Israeli state ‘spokespeople’ do refer to their ‘homeland’ to defend their right to be there, but this was never an exclusively Jewish homeland. The problem we face is what to do about the consequences of imposing an ethno-centric modern nation state in what was once a shared space. The so-called two-state solution is no longer viable and given the in-balance between the Palestinians and Israel, was never viable. A much bigger leap is required that takes us back to a shared territorial space in which Jews and Palestinians learn to live together as equals in every sense. Many Jews in Israel and abroad feel the same.